Atmospheric methane concentrations continue to increase globally, despite a pledge in 2016 from the leaders of the United States, Canada, and Mexico to reduce methane emissions from each country’s oil and gas sector. Additionally, the trilateral methane pledge faces more challenges as the Trump Administration seeks to reverse federal methane research and control efforts.
Yet this ambitious pledge is still achievable in the United States, according to a new article in Climate Policy co-authored by Dr. Sarah Marie Jordaan, Assistant Professor of Energy, Resources and Environment at the Johns Hopkins University School of Advanced International Studies (SAIS), and Kate Konschnik, lead author and Director of the Climate and Energy Program at Duke University’s Nicholas Institute for Environmental Policy Solutions.
The researchers suggest that estimating emissions consistently across U.S. jurisdictions in support of a robust baseline will help the North American countries to achieve the goal by 2025, if coupled with science-based, economically sound policies to minimize methane leakage.
“It is critical — for both the development of the sector and the environment — that decision-makers in government and industry rely not only on politics and economics, but also scientific evidence,” Dr. Jordaan said. “We have developed a coherent framework that integrates science and policy to help decision-makers to do just that, in support of both economic and environmental goals.”
Konschnik noted that the climate benefits of using natural gas rather than coal to generate electricity evaporate if methane leakage across the natural gas value chain is too high. “Agencies and industry can tackle methane emissions more effectively by monitoring technological advances in this field, and generating data for future research,” she said.
The scholars surveyed efforts to estimate and mitigate methane emissions in the U.S., Canada, and Mexico. They propose a North American Methane Reduction Framework to integrate public and private research and mitigation policies.
Jordaan and Konschnik are available to further discuss:
• How can the three countries collaborate to integrate climate research and policies?
• How do the findings differ for each country and jurisdiction?
• Can emissions reduction goals be met without political support of climate policy?
• What are the long-term environmental benefits of curtailing emissions?
For an interview, please contact:
Public Relations Specialist
The Nicholas Institute for Environmental Policy Solutions
About The Nicholas Institute for Environmental Policy Solutions
The Nicholas Institute for Environmental Policy Solutions at Duke University helps decision makers create timely, effective and economically practical solutions to the world’s critical environmental challenges. Through its six programs, the Nicholas Institute mobilizes objective, rigorous research to confront the climate crisis, clarify the economics of limiting carbon pollution, harness emerging environmental markets, put the value of nature's benefits on the balance sheet, develop adaptive water management approaches, and identify other strategies to attain community resilience.
NOTE TO JOURNALISTS
When referencing the article: Please include Journal title, author, published by Taylor & Francis and the following statement: